DAILYMAIL - Was ISRAEL behind the hacking of millions of French phones and NOT the U.S.? Extraordinary twist in spying saga revealed Israel and not America was behind the hacking of millions of French phones, it was claimed today. In the latest extraordinary twist in the global eavesdropping scandal, Israeli agents are said to have intercepted more than 70 million calls and text messages a month. Up until now the French have been blaming the U.S., even summoning the country’s Paris ambassador to provide an explanation. But today’s Le Monde newspaper provides evidence that it was in fact Israeli agents who were listening in. France first suspected the U.S. of hacking into former president Nicolas Sarkozy’s communications network when he was unsuccessfully trying for re-election in 2012. Intelligence officials Bernard Barbier and Patrick Pailloux travelled from Paris to Washington to demand an explanation, but the Americans hinted that the Israelis were to blame.The Americans insisted they have never been behind any hacking in France, and were always keen to get on with the French, whom they viewed as some of their closest allies. They were so determined to be friends with the French, that U.S. briefing notes included details of how to pronounce the names of the Gallic officials. A note published in Le Monde shows that the Americans refused to rule out Mossad, Israel’s notoriously uncompromising intelligence agency, or the ISNU, Israel’s cyber-intelligence unit. Tailored Access Operations (TAO), the branch of the US National Security Agency (NSA) which deals with cyber-attacks, is referred to throughout the note. It reads: ‘TAO intentionally did not ask either Mossad or ISNU whether they were involved as France is not an approved target for joint discussions.’ Le Monde’s article, co-authored by U.S. journalist Glenn Greenwald, whose main contact is NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, however, hints that the Israelis were doing the spying. Both US and French intelligence work closely with Mossad, but there is known to be a great deal of suspicion between all the agencies. A 2008 NSA note says that the Israelis are ‘excellent partners in terms of sharing information’, but it also says that Mossad is ‘the third most aggressive intelligence service in the world against the United States’. A spokesman for the Israeli government told Le Monde: ‘Israel is a country which is a friend, ally and partner of France and does not carry out any hostile activity which could pose a threat to its security.’ France has complained in the past about Mossad's use of its soil to plan so called black operations including the 2010 assassination in Dubai of Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh of the Palestinian movement Hamas.(...)

AMERICAN FREE PRESSRevelations About NSA Spying on Israel Could Possibly End in Release of Traitor
By Victor Thorn
In
a shocking new disclosure that is guaranteed to send the Israeli lobby
in the U.S. into apoplexy, Glenn Greenwald of Britain’s Guardian
newspaper—the primary recipient of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden’s
leaks—is reporting that U.S. intelligence agencies regularly spied on
top Israeli officials in order to keep tabs on its plans for a possible
attack on Iran.
After scores of documents leaked by Snowden were made
public last year, U.S. surveillance practices conducted by the National
Security Agency (NSA) have faced heavy criticism from world leaders.
This backlash won’t be lessening any time soon.
According
to Snowden, NSA officials collaborated with the UK’s central spy
agency, GCHQ, to directly monitor the email accounts of Israeli Defense
Minister Ehud Barak and then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert.
An Israeli military intelligence outlet known as Debka verified the NSA’s practices in an October 2013 report.
“[The
Agency] had a single narrow focus: to pick up the slightest murmur or
clue suggesting that Israel was about to launch an attack on Iran’s
nuclear sites,” reported Debka.
The Israeli news agency added that
spies were instructed to scrutinize “any orders placed suddenly for
large quantities of aircraft fuel, or the import of unusual amounts of
emergency medical equipment.”
Although no one can be certain of what
materials Greenwald may next release, on Jan. 9 AFP spoke with a source
in Boston that requested his name be withheld.
Characterizing himself
as a rabbi who has consulted on Mideast peace negotiations in the past,
the source told AFP: “In professional circles, intelligence people know
that everyone’s trying to get information about everyone else. So, it’s
not surprising that the U.S. is spying. Israel does the same thing to
protect [its] interests.”
One interesting aspect of the NSA-Israeli
relationship that will always be a sore spot involves the latest push to
free convicted spy Jonathan Pollard, who in 1987 received a life
sentence for committing treason against the U.S.
Since Pollard’s
imprisonment, Israeli politicians, especially Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, have made appeals for his release. Although every U.S.
president since Ronald Reagan has denied these requests, on Dec. 27,
2013 Secretary of State John Kerry floated the possibility of freeing
Pollard in exchange for 26 Arab inmates held in Israeli custody.
Even
Greenwald himself seems to be shilling for Pollard’s freedom, claiming
that Israeli leaders are correct in their attempts to link NSA spying
revelations with this notorious agent’s pardon.
On Jan. 11, AFP
contacted Joseph Bishop, an international teacher who has taught English
in Russia and the Ukraine. When asked about Kerry offering Pollard as a
bargaining chip, Bishop replied:
“This move says that Kerry has no principles. He’d give up anything.”
Expanding
further on this thought, Bishop asserted: “Netanyahu is the primary
reason why Pollard is even on the table. To me, it seems that talks
about Pollard are a gesture of compromise or conciliation by the Obama
administration, almost like a quid pro quo since they haven’t invaded
Syria or Iran. Pollard’s possible freedom almost seems like an
expression of sorrow or guilt that the NSA spied on Israel.”

Lawmakers accuse Snowden of being ‘Russian spy’ed note–it goes without saying, but nevertheless keep in
mind as you consider this statement that both of these individuals are
in the paid service of the State of Israel, making THEM in effect
‘spies’ as well.
Snowden, un "espion russe"? Il est
toujours important de brouiller les pistes. Sauf quand le but est
d'intimider... Or ici Israël et son réseau mondial d'espionnage ne
cherche pas à nous intimider, il cherche à obtenir notre appui dans son
combat contre la NSA, donc il doit brouiller les pistes.

Hundreds of Israeli military officers, intelligence operatives, and
those working for the country's defense industry are being denied U.S.
visas once routinely approved, the Hebrew tabloid Ma'ariv reported in
its Tuesday edition.

Influential Newsweek Magazine Sold for $1 to CFR’s Super-Rich, Pro-Israel Harman Couple
(...)That Jane Harman should now be a major
media force is disturbing to those who value both national security
and individual rights. Mrs. Harman’s corrupt behind-the-scenes activity
on behalf of Israel and its American operations was discovered in 2006
when Mrs. Harman—a strong supporter of the warrantless wiretaps
program of the Bush administration—was overheard speaking on the
telephone with a known Israeli spy operating in the U.S. whose phone
was being tapped by the National Security Agency. The spy’s identity
has never been made public.

Over
the wiretap, Harman was heard agreeing with the Israeli agent to use
her influence as a member of Congress to try to scuttle the
then-standing federal criminal indictment of two former AIPAC officials
charged with illicitly procuring American defense secrets on behalf of
Israel.

According to reports—which were quickly brushed away by
the mainstream media—the Israeli operative promised Harman that the
Jewish lobby would reward her for her efforts on behalf of the accused
traitors by pushing then-House Minority Leader (now Speaker) Nancy
Pelosi to appoint Harman as chair of the House Intelligence Committee.
This would have been a lucrative plum for Harman and her friends in
Israel.

Indicating clearly that Mrs. Harman knew she was engaged
in influence peddling and obstruction of justice (not to mention
aiding and abetting in the illicit trade in data relating to U.S.
national security), Harman was heard by the NSA telling her telephonic
co-conspirator, “This conversation doesn’t exist.”

Harman was
investigated by the CIA for her intrigues, but the Bush
administration’s then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales pressured the
CIA to back off; the administration valued Harman’s support for the
warrantless wiretaps of U.S. citizens.

In the end, the indictment
against AIPAC’s Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman was dropped—much to the
consternation of loyal American FBI agents who had accumulated the
data that led to the two men being charged and to the outrage of the
Justice Department attorneys who had stewarded the indictment through
the federal grand jury process. But Harman didn’t get the chairmanship
of the committee. She was clearly “too hot to handle.”

Harman
and her defenders decry the allegations against the billionaire
congresswoman. But all of the information pinpoints Mrs. Harman as
someone who definitely shouldn’t be in Congress, let alone among the
last who should have any control over one of America’s most influential
weekly magazines.

Whatever happened to honor among thieves? When the National
Security Agency was caught eavesdropping on German Chancellor Angela
Merkel’s cell phone, it was considered a rude way to treat a friend. Now
U.S. intelligence officials are saying—albeit very quietly, behind
closed doors on Capitol Hill—that our Israeli “friends” have gone too
far with their spying operations here.

According to classified briefings on legislation that would lower
visa restrictions on Israeli citizens, Jerusalem’s efforts to steal U.S.
secrets under the cover of trade missions and joint defense technology
contracts have “crossed red lines.”

Israel’s espionage activities in America are unrivaled and unseemly,
counterspies have told members of the House Judiciary and Foreign
Affairs committees, going far beyond activities by other close allies,
such as Germany, France, the U.K. and Japan. A congressional staffer
familiar with a briefing last January called the testimony “very
sobering…alarming…even terrifying.” Another staffer called it
“damaging.”

“No other country close to the United States continues to cross the
line on espionage like the Israelis do,” said a former congressional
staffer who attended another classified briefing in late 2013, one of
several in recent months given by officials from the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS), the State Department, the FBI and the National
Counterintelligence Directorate.

The intelligence agencies didn’t go into specifics, the former aide
said, but cited “industrial espionage—folks coming over here on trade
missions or with Israeli companies working in collaboration with
American companies, [or] intelligence operatives being run directly by
the government, which I assume meant out of the [Israeli] Embassy.”

An Israeli Embassy spokesman flatly denied the charges Tuesday after initially declining to comment. Aaron Sagui told Newsweek "Israel
doesn't conduct espionage operations in the United States, period. We
condemn the fact that such outrageous, false allegations are being
directed against Israel." Representatives of two U.S. intelligence
agencies, while acknowledging problems with Israeli spies, would not
discuss classified testimony for the record. The FBI would neither
confirm nor deny it briefed Congress. A State Department representative
would say only that staff in its Consular and Israel Palestinian Affairs
offices briefed members of Congress on visa reciprocity issues.

Of course, the U.S. spies on Israel, too. “It was the last place you wanted to go on vacation,” a former top CIA operative told Newsweek, because of heavy-handed Israeli surveillance. But the level of Israeli espionage here now has rankled U.S. counterspies.

“I don’t think anyone was surprised by these revelations,” the former
aide said. “But when you step back and hear…that there are no other
countries taking advantage of our security relationship the way the
Israelis are for espionage purposes, it is quite shocking. I mean, it
shouldn’t be lost on anyone that after all the hand-wringing over
[Jonathan] Pollard, it’s still going on.”

Israel and pro-Israel groups in America have long lobbied U.S.
administrations to free Pollard, a former U.S. naval intelligence
analyst serving a life sentence since 1987 for stealing tens of
thousands of secrets for Israel. (U.S. counterintelligence officials
suspect that Israel traded some of the Cold War-era information to
Moscow in exchange for the emigration of Russian Jews.) After denying
for over a decade that Pollard was its paid agent, Israel apologized and
promised not to spy on U.S. soil again. Since then, more Israeli spies
have been arrested and convicted by U.S. courts.

I.C. Smith, a former top FBI counterintelligence specialist during the Pollard affair, tells Newsweek,
“In the early 1980s, dealing with the Israelis was, for those assigned
that area, extremely frustrating. The Israelis were supremely confident
that they had the clout, especially on the Hill, to basically get [away]
with just about anything. This was the time of the Criteria Country
List—later changed to the National Security Threat List—and I found it
incredible that Taiwan and Vietnam, for instance, were on [it], when
neither country had conducted activities that remotely approached the
Pollard case, and neither had a history of, or a comparable capability
to conduct, such activities.”

While all this was going on, Israel was lobbying hard to be put on
the short list of countries (38 today) whose citizens don’t need visas
to visit here.

Until recently, the major sticking point was the Jewish state’s
discriminatory and sometimes harsh treatment of Arab-Americans and U.S.
Palestinians seeking to enter Israel. It has also failed to meet other
requirements for the program, such as promptly and regularly reporting
lost and stolen passports, officials say—a problem all the more pressing
since Iranians were found to have boarded the missing Malaysia Airlines
flight with stolen passports.

“But this is the first time congressional aides have indicated that
intelligence and national security concerns also are considerations in
weighing Israel’s admission into the visa waiver program,” Jonathan
Broder, the foreign and defense editor for CQ Roll Call, a Capitol Hill
news site, wrote last month. He quoted a senior House aide as saying,
“The U.S. intelligence community is concerned that adding Israel to the
visa waiver program would make it easier for Israeli spies to enter the
country.”

The Israelis “thought they could just snap their fingers” and get
friends in Congress to legislate visa changes, a Hill aide said, instead
of going through the required hoops with DHS. But facing resistance
from U.S. intelligence, Israel recently signaled it’s willing to work
with DHS, both Israeli and U.S. officials say. “Israel is interested in
entering into the visa waiver program and is taking concrete steps to
meet its conditions,” Israeli Embassy spokesman Aaron Sagui told Newsweek.
“Most recently, the U.S. and Israel decided to establish a working
group to advance the process,” Sagui added, saying that “Deputy Minister
of Foreign Affairs Zeev Elkin will head the Israeli delegation.” He
refused to say when the Elkin delegation was coming.

Congressional aides snorted at the announcement. “The Israelis
haven’t done s**t to get themselves into the visa waiver program,” the
former congressional aide said, echoing the views of two other House
staffers working on the issue. “I mean, if the Israelis got themselves
into this visa waiver program and if we were able to address this
[intelligence community] concern—great, they’re a close ally, there are
strong economic and cultural links between the two countries, it would
be wonderful if more Israelis could come over here without visas. I’m
sure it would spur investment and tourist dollars in our economy and so
on and so forth. But what I find really funny is they haven’t done s**t
to get into the program. They think that their friends in Congress can
get them in, and that’s not the case. Congress can lower one or two of
the barriers, but they can’t just legislate the Israelis in.”

The path to visa waivers runs through DHS and can take years to
navigate. For Chile, it was three years, a government official said on a
not-for-attribution basis; for Taiwan, “several.” Requirements include
“enhanced law enforcement and security-related data sharing with the
United States; timely reporting of lost and stolen passports; and the
maintenance of high counterterrorism, law enforcement, border control,
aviation and document security standards,” a DHS statement said.

Israel is not even close to meeting those standards, a congressional
aide said. “You’ve got to have machine-readable passports in place—the
e-passports with a data chip in them. The Israelis have only just
started to issue them to diplomats and senior officials and so forth,
and that probably won’t be rolled out to the rest of their population
for another 10 years.”

But U.S. counterspies will get the final word. And since Israel is as
likely to stop spying here as it is to give up matzo for Passover, the
visa barriers are likely to stay up.

As Paul Pillar, the CIA’s former national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia, told Newsweek,
old habits are hard to break: Zionists were dispatching spies to
America before there even was an Israel, to gather money and materials
for the cause and later the fledgling state. Key components for Israel’s
nuclear bombs were clandestinely obtained here. “They’ve found creative
and inventive ways,” Pillar said, to get what they want.

“If we give them free rein to send people over here, how are we going
to stop that?” the former congressional aide asked. “They’re incredibly
aggressive. They’re aggressive in all aspects of their relationship
with the United States. Why would their intelligence relationship with
us be any different?”

Kerry-Netanyahu call abruptly terminated
Prime minister, secretary of state spoke on Sunday, but the
conversation was ended due to 'communications issue' according to State
Department; Kerry not planning to attend Cairo talks
ÇA COUPE...? LE MOSSAD À L'ÉCOUTE?

What are we going to negotiate about? I would say ‘Listen, you see that desert out there, I want to show you something.’ …You pick up your cell phone and you call somewhere in Nebraska and you say, ‘OK let it go.’ And so there’s an atomic weapon, goes over ballistic missiles, the middle of the desert, that doesn’t hurt a soul. Maybe a couple of rattlesnakes, and scorpions, or whatever. Then you say, ‘See! The next one is in the middle of Tehran. So, we mean business. You want to be wiped out? Go ahead and take a tough position and continue with your nuclear development. You want to be peaceful? Just reverse it all, and we will guarantee you that you can have a nuclear power plant for electricity purposes, energy purposes.’

Iran-West deal Netanyahu’s nightmare A member of Iran’s Majlis says Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is having nightmares about a potential agreement between Iran and the West over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear energy program.

The US folded during negotiations in Geneva with Iran over its nuclear project, political sources in Israel charged on Saturday. They added that Israel was stunned when it learned over the weekend that a version of the deal being proposed was far worse than it believed.

Obama and Kerry's betrayal of 'never again' What President Obama means when he says he has Israel's back is that he will partner with Israel's enemies behind its back, giving succor to a regime that operates against both Israel and the U.S.

President Obama had to
choose between dishonor and war, and he chose dishonor. Now we will have
war. He has dishonored US allies in the Middle East, including Israel
and the Persian Gulf states, by abandoning their security concerns regarding a nuclear Iran
by believing that appeasing Iran is the only way to avoid war.These words are those of Churchill after the Munich Agreement was
signed, when Britain and France believed that handing Czechoslovakia to
Hitler was the only way to save the world from another war.(...)

Israel: "Worse than a Nuclear Bomb"
Paraphrasing President Obama, Netanyahu said "Today the world has become a much more dangerous place because the most dangerous regime in the world has taken a significant step toward attaining the most dangerous weapon in the world."

The two countries have both united in worry
that the West may come to terms with Iran, easing sanctions and allowing
the Islamic Republic to continue its nuclear program. According to the Sunday Times, Riyadh has
agreed to let Israel use its airspace in a military strike on Iran and
cooperate over the use of rescue helicopters, tanker planes and drones.

A recent letter attacking Democratic National Committee Chairwoman
Debbie Wasserman Schultz is causing an internal brouhaha at the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee, The Cable has learned. (...) That AIPAC was driving hard for new Iran sanctions legislation
surprised no one. But its use of a right-wing blog to target a
well-connected Jewish Democrat with a long history of support for Israel
raised eyebrows among some current and former AIPAC officials. It also
raised concerns that AIPAC's open revolt against the White House's Iran
diplomacy could fray its relations with liberal Democrats on the Hill.

New
York money is not only playing a big part in 2008 presidential campaign
politics, but it's also a driving force behind the ongoing push by
pro-Israel fanatics at the highest levels of U.S. policy-making to force
the United States into a senseless war against Iran.

That's
the only conclusion that can be reached based on a survey of multiple
and wide-ranging news reports—circulating largely within publications in
Israel and in the American Jewish community—that have not been brought
to the attention of most Americans through the aegis of the so-called
"mainstream media."

It's almost as
if the major media in America is simply determined to prevent average
Americans from knowing that there are some people who believe that
Israel and its well-heeled backers in the United States are the primary
advocates for U.S. military action against Iran.

Perhaps
the most explosive comments in this regard came from Gen. Wesley Clark
(ret.), who was a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination
in 2004 and who—until then, at least—was considered a likely candidate
for the Democratic nod in 2008. In an interview with columnist Arianna
Huffington, Clark said that he believed that the Bush administration is
determined to wage war against Iran. When asked why he believed this,
Clark said:

You
just have to read what's in the Israeli press. The Jewish community is
divided but there is so much pressure being channeled from the New York
money people to the office seekers.

In
short, Clark was saying that powerful New York-based financial
interests (those whom he called "the New York money people") are putting
pressure on political candidates and incumbent politicians to support a
war against Iran.

In fact, Clark
was correct. Jewish community newspapers have indeed noted, time and
again over the past several years, that many in the American Jewish
community and in Israel are urging U.S. military action against Iran.
And in Israel, of course, the bellicose talk of Israel itself attacking
Iran is commonly and publicly discussed with free abandon. All of this
is little known to the American public.

Despite
this, Clark came under fire and was accused of "anti- Semitism" or
otherwise charged with lending credence to what are dismissed as
"anti-Israel and anti- Jewish conspiracy theories," which—Clark's angry
critics said—suggest that Israel and its supporters are prime movers
behind the drive for war.

Because
Clark is the son of a Jewish father (although he didn't know that until
several years ago, having been raised by a Christian mother and a
Christian step-father who never told Clark of his Jewish heritage), some
Jewish leaders were pulling their punches, recognizing that it sounded
somewhat outlandish to call Clark "anti-Jewish." But the word is
definitely out in the Jewish community: "Clark can't be trusted."

On
Jan. 12,2007, the New York-based Jewish newspaper, Forward, carried a
front-page story zinging Clark for his remarks, noting that,"The phrase
New York money people' struck unpleasant chords with many pro- Israel
activists. They interpreted it as referring to the Jewish community,
which is known for its significant financial donations to political
candidates."

The fact that Jewish
leaders and publications were attacking Clark for using the term "New
York money people" was ironic, inasmuch as just the week before the
furor over Clark's comments, the same Forward, in its own Jan. 5, 2007
issue, had a front-page story announcing that pro-Israel stalwart U.S.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had lined up significant financial support
for his own 2008 presidential campaign from those whom—in its own
headline—Forward called "New York money men."

In
that revealing article, describing McCain's "heavily Jewish finance
committee," Forward announced that, in recent weeks, "McCain has been
signaling that an attention to Jewish issues will remain on his agenda
as his campaign moves forward." The Jewish newspaper did not mention
whether McCain will direct any attention to Christian, Muslim, Buddhist
or Hindu issues—or any other issues of concern to other religious
groups.

The article in Forward made
it clear that support from these "New York money men" is critical in the
forthcoming presidential campaign and that it could be pivotal, whether
that money stays in McCain's camp or ultimately goes elsewhere.

This
information could prove a surprise to grass-roots Republicans all over
America who think (apparently incorrectly) that they are the ones who
actually pick their party's presidential nominee.

In
addition, in light of the fact that Jewish groups attacked Clark for
suggesting that "New York money people" were pressuring political
candidates to push for war against Iran, it is interesting to note that
Forward pointed out that one of the key "New York money men" supporting
McCain cited the issue of Iran as one of the reasons why he was boosting
the Arizona senator.

Dr. Ben
Chouake, who is president of the pro-Israel NORPAC, a political action
committee, and a member of McCain's finance committee, was cited as
having remarked that Iran is "an immense threat to the United States,
and this is an immense threat to Israel," and that "the person that is
the most capable, most experienced, most courageous to defend our
country, would be John McCain."

Clearly,
the "New York money people" are playing a major part in the American
political arena, throwing their weight behind who gets elected— and who
doesn't—and whether or not America goes to war.

That's something that Americans need to know about, but they had better not count on the mass media to tell them about it.

Former UK cabinet minister and
one of the main backers of the illegal invasion of Iraq, Jack Straw, has
openly admitted that “unlimited funds” available to the Jewish lobby
AIPAC are used to control American foreign policy in the Middle East.

Straw, who is of distant Jewish descent
himself, made the remarks during a debate in the British last week
during the Round Table Global Diplomatic Forum in the British House of
Commons.

Straw said, according to Wilf, that the
greatest obstacles to peace between Israel and the Palestinians and her
Arab neighbors are the “unlimited” funds available to Jewish
organizations and AIPAC in the U.S., as well as Germany’s “obsession”
with defending Israel.

Straw served as both Home Secretary and
Foreign Secretary under Prime Minister Tony Blair, and as Secretary of
State of Justice under Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

Straw also said Germany’s “obsession” with defending Israel was another impediment to peace.

Straw’s about turn and open admission on
the role of the Jewish Supremacist lobby has come as a surprise to many
observers, as he was one of the major players behind the illegal
invasion of Iraq which was carried out in response to demands from the
Zionist lobby to attack that nation—even though it had no connection
whatsoever to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001.

Straw admitted he advised the Cabinet
that invasion would be legal without a fresh United Nations mandate days
after Lord Goldsmith, the then attorney general, had said privately
that the opposite was true.